V2 of dovecot has had the following releases (to recap) 2.0.0 2010-08-16 2.0.1 2010-08-24 2.0.2 2010-09-08 2.0.3 2010-09-17 2.0.4 2010-09-26 2.0.5 2010-10-01 I am on FreeBSD, and the port committers want to wait till dovecot V2 "stabilizes" prior to adding it to the FreeBSD ports base. So, my question is, respectfully, is dovecot V2.0.5 stable enough for prime-time on a busy ISP mail server? I'll install it myself independent of the FreeBSD ports tree if so. Thanks,
I am running 2.0.5 (svn repository) in production for about a thousand users without major issues. On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 09:47:42 -0700, Jim Pazarena wrote:> V2 of dovecot has had the followingreleases (to recap)> > 2.0.0 2010-08-16 > 2.0.1 2010-08-24 > 2.0.22010-09-08> 2.0.3 2010-09-17 > 2.0.4 2010-09-26 > 2.0.5 2010-10-01 > >I am on FreeBSD, and the port committers want to wait till> dovecot V2"stabilizes" prior to adding it to the FreeBSD> ports base. > > So, myquestion is, respectfully, is dovecot V2.0.5 stable enough> forprime-time on a busy ISP mail server? I'll install it myself>independent of the FreeBSD ports tree if so.> > Thanks,
On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 09:47 -0700, Jim Pazarena wrote:> So, my question is, respectfully, is dovecot V2.0.5 stable enough > for prime-time on a busy ISP mail server? I'll install it myself > independent of the FreeBSD ports tree if so.It's getting better :) I'll make 2.0.6 release this week again with more fixes, but I still have a few bug reports that I haven't managed to reproduce.
> On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 09:47 -0700, Jim Pazarena wrote: > >> So, my question is, respectfully, is dovecot V2.0.5 stable enough >> for prime-time on a busy ISP mail server? I'll install it myself >> independent of the FreeBSD ports tree if so. > > It's getting better :) I'll make 2.0.6 release this week again with more > fixes, but I still have a few bug reports that I haven't managed to > reproduce.I'm concerned with the very same question. I currently have 1.2.12 running very well and I see risk in an upgrade to ver 2.x. Unless of course the benefits outweigh the risks. I have been carefully watching the ver 2.x tree rev from week to week and I await the defacto signal from people that it is in fact at least as solid at 1.2.12, that signal being adoption by people in busy mail servers. So therefore I await ver 2.0.6 with a mix of conflicting anticipation and trepidation. :-) -- Dennis Clarke dclarke at opensolaris.ca <- Email related to the open source Solaris dclarke at blastwave.org <- Email related to open source for Solaris
> > > I am running 2.0.5 (svn repository) in production for about a > thousand users without major issues.Please Sir, on what OS and architecture ? -- Dennis
On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 13:46 -0400, Dennis Clarke wrote:> > I am running 2.0.5 (svn repository) in production for about a > > thousand users without major issues. > > Please Sir, on what OS and architecture ?I think the stability has less to do with that, and more to do with what parts of Dovecot you want to use. If your test setup works fine with the most common clients you use, and it survives a bit of stress testing, it should work fine. The things I still mostly worry about are some rare errors/crashes.
> On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 13:46 -0400, Dennis Clarke wrote: > >> > I am running 2.0.5 (svn repository) in production for about a >> > thousand users without major issues. >> >> Please Sir, on what OS and architecture ? > > I think the stability has less to do with that, and more to do with what > parts of Dovecot you want to use. If your test setup works fine with the > most common clients you use, and it survives a bit of stress testing, it > should work fine. > > The things I still mostly worry about are some rare errors/crashes.There is still a rather large number of Solaris 8 Sparc servers out there running in production and based on the conversations I have had with some sysadmins they will upgrade them when the smoke comes out. That could be another five years. So, before you say "stability has less to do with that" you should see the horrendous work it takes to port an app from the open source world ( usually Linux people with tons of Linux-isms/GCC-isms in it ) over to an old POSIX/XPG4 ( POSIX.1-1990, POSIX.2-1992, POSIX.1b-1993, POSIX.1c-1996 etc ) compliant UNIX. My coffee cup needs whiskey some days ;-) -- Dennis Clarke dclarke at opensolaris.ca <- Email related to the open source Solaris dclarke at blastwave.org <- Email related to open source for Solaris
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 09:47:42 -0700 Jim Pazarena <dovecot at paz.bz> articulated:> V2 of dovecot has had the following releases (to recap) > > 2.0.0 2010-08-16 > 2.0.1 2010-08-24 > 2.0.2 2010-09-08 > 2.0.3 2010-09-17 > 2.0.4 2010-09-26 > 2.0.5 2010-10-01 > > I am on FreeBSD, and the port committers want to wait till > dovecot V2 "stabilizes" prior to adding it to the FreeBSD > ports base. > > So, my question is, respectfully, is dovecot V2.0.5 stable enough > for prime-time on a busy ISP mail server? I'll install it myself > independent of the FreeBSD ports tree if so.Five updates in something like 63 days is certainly not encouraging. I am sure that Timo is doing the best he can; however, unless you had some over whelming need to update, and I would really like to know what this is, I would recommend waiting. By the way, I am also using FreeBSD-8.1/amd64. Until Dovecot can go a few months without a patch being issued, I think I'll wait. I certainly don't need any clients waking me up at 3 o'clock in the morning. -- Jerry ? Dovecot.user at seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __________________________________________________________________
I am on FreeBSD 8.1/amd64 and running Dovecot 2.0.5 on 8+ boxes. I just tweaked my port source to install the 2.0.x version instead of 1.2.x. It's been very stable for us without any issues. -c On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 10:47 AM, Jim Pazarena <dovecot at paz.bz> wrote:> V2 of dovecot has had the following releases (to recap) > > 2.0.0 ?2010-08-16 > 2.0.1 ?2010-08-24 > 2.0.2 ?2010-09-08 > 2.0.3 ?2010-09-17 > 2.0.4 ?2010-09-26 > 2.0.5 ?2010-10-01 > > I am on FreeBSD, and the port committers want to wait till > dovecot V2 "stabilizes" prior to adding it to the FreeBSD > ports base. > > So, my question is, respectfully, is dovecot V2.0.5 stable enough > for prime-time on a busy ISP mail server? I'll install it myself > independent of the FreeBSD ports tree if so. > > Thanks, >
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 7:47 PM, Jim Pazarena <dovecot at paz.bz> wrote:> V2 of dovecot has had the following releases (to recap) > > 2.0.0 2010-08-16 > 2.0.1 2010-08-24 > 2.0.2 2010-09-08 > 2.0.3 2010-09-17 > 2.0.4 2010-09-26 > 2.0.5 2010-10-01 > > I am on FreeBSD, and the port committers want to wait till > dovecot V2 "stabilizes" prior to adding it to the FreeBSD > ports base. > > So, my question is, respectfully, is dovecot V2.0.5 stable enough > for prime-time on a busy ISP mail server? I'll install it myself > independent of the FreeBSD ports tree if so. >I have been using the 2.0 branch on several sites, each having a few hundred users. Funnily I have never had any negative report from any of the sites. That could be because I use a pretty standard config without any tweaks. Sites are using FreeBSD 6.x, 7.x and 8.1-STABLE. -- Best regards, Odhiambo WASHINGTON, Nairobi,KE +254733744121/+254722743223 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Damn!!
On 2010-10-18 9:47 AM, Jim Pazarena wrote:> V2 of dovecot has had the following releases (to recap) > > 2.0.0 2010-08-16 > 2.0.1 2010-08-24 > 2.0.2 2010-09-08 > 2.0.3 2010-09-17 > 2.0.4 2010-09-26 > 2.0.5 2010-10-012.0.6 2010-10-25 2.0.7 2010-11-12 FreeBSD added dovecot2 to the ports recently (finally) Thank-you, & yay!